. . . Ligurians are amongst the most ancient Indo-Europeans present in Italy and now we know that R-U152 has its highest percentage among Ligurians who were probably at the origin also of this haplogroup.

I've been looking for R-U152 haplotypes from Italy, Switzerland and Austria (well, France and Germany too) to see if the variance in N.Italy is high like I use to always think it was. I'm not find any variance numbers in studies on this, just frequency data. Does anybody have this? I was told the Underhill study found R-U152 was "ancient" in Italy, but I hope they were evaluating diversity and not just frequency.

Most of the countries have a limited number of ht's, but Italy, Switzerland, Germany and perhaps France have enough to consider.

I'm just not detecting high variance in Italy for R-U152. This doesn't mean that R-L23* or R-L51* was not there long before U152, but it's beginning to look like the majority of R-M269 in Italy came from the north.

Even if France is a cross-roads or destination for R-U152 types, it shouldn't have more variance than the original source location so between north** of the Alps or south of the Alps, the south seems to be eliminated as the source for U152.

** EDIT: What I meant is just outside the Alps and Cisalpine Gaul.

Here is what our 67 marker DNA project data shows....

Quote from: Mike on Jan 19

I'll try to peel the onion back on R-P312's largest subclades. R-U152 appears to be the oldest identified subclade of R-P312. Remember to focus on the "Rel.Var." column. It is the variance relative to all of R-P312 (=1.00). Ignore NVar.COUNTRY/REGION Rel.Var._ N.Rel.Var.__ GD to COUNTRY Modal _ No. Ht's

This isn't really what I was expecting for R-U152. N.Italy had lower variance than I would have thought, although if you get down to the level of L2 you'll see N.Italy has somewhat higher variance.

Also, keep in mind that as the sample sizes shrink, chances for error go up.

Unfortunately, Myres did not do a good job of surveying France - just the location in SE France - Vaucluse.

If I put on my blinders to history, archaeology and linguistics and just look at the data and geography, my opinion is:

U152's initial large expansion was from the Rhine Valley, particularly the lower (northern) Rhine. U152 expanded over the Alps into Italy, though, and L2 was the primary subclade of U152 driving this.

Although I'm sure there was some mixing, I think L21 blocked U152 to the west and northwest whereas U106/I1/R1a1 blocked it to the north and east although parts of U152 did an end around and made it a long way east.

Of course, if you look at history and archaelogy (and the east to west patterns) you could interpret that U152 came from quite a distance to the east, but just didn't exploded until it hit the Rhine Valley.

Very hard to match the movement from the Lower Rhine (mainly low countries west of the Rhine??) down to Rhine and into Italy in archaeology. If someone described that to me with no reference to variance or dates I would think of Germanci movements at the end of the Roman empire sooner than I could think of any match in prehistory. A few years ago the old beaker theory that placed their origin in the Low Countries might have fitted but noone seems to believe that theory now.

It is interesting if (as variance suggests) S116 first expanded in the SE France area and U152 in the Belgium area and L21 in western half of northern France and U106 around the south Baltic coast. These are all areas which were not settled by the LBK farmers who sort of bypassed these spots, treating them as undesirable. They were areas of major expansion of farming in the middle Neolithic. In fact the other strong areas of these clades all have a resememble a map of the areas of western Europe that were not yet settled by farmers until not much before c. 4000BC. L21-Atlantic France and the isles, U152-Belgium, Alpine areas, north Italy, Massive Central, U106-the north European Plain (Funnel Beaker/TRB area). Maybe those areas that were peripheral to the earliest farmers preferences still presented opportunity in the middle Neolithic because they were not settled. Each of these clade epicentres could represent L11 moving into an area with real expansion opportunities although I suppose they are really just two events - U106 in NE Europe and S116 and clades in and around France. If this is correct then their should be identifiable middle Neolithic matches for these expansions. For U106 it would probably be TRB/Funnel beaker. For L21 perhaps the Carninated Bowl tradition of France and the isles, for U152 I need to do my homework!! Ehm Maybe Rossen or the like or maybe something to do with Chassee. They all (depending on who you believe-there seems to be disagreement) have roots in the late LBK cultures but perhaps with something extra. Its the only correlation I can think of as an alternatvie to the beaker model. I would personally see the rise of language groups and ethnic identities as down to interaction networks forming identities some time after the initial dispersal of L11. I would see all the L11 clades at the points of spread into these areas as linguistically being undifferentiated west IE or maybe proto-Italo-Celtic, including Ligurians. I personally think clade patterns were dictated by geography and oppotunity during their dispersal and language groups were also dictated by contact networks that were in turn dictated partly by geography but also other considerations such as trade items, ores etc. The two things would have at best an imperfect correlation.

Rich, I thank you for having quoted me. About Ligurians I’d add that the map of U152.org. demonstrates also the highest percentage of R-U152 also in Lunigiana, Versilia till Pisa and the Monti Pisani, which were Ligurian territory more than Etruscan, even though there were Etruscan settlements (Chiavari, the same Genoa, many places in Versilia which have an Etruscan name: Vietina, etc.) Ancient Ligurians weren’t in to-day Liguria alone, but also in Piedmont and all South France: the “Provincia” before being Roman was Ligurian). The same Spain was peopled by Ligurians (or Indo-Europeans from Italy) and also to-day Iberians, Tuscans and North Italians are pretty the same at an autosomal level (see Dienekes’s Dodecad). The percentage of R1b in Garfagnana is at the level of Basque Countries or Ireland. If I can say something personal, I’ve found a cousin of 4th grade in California whose ancestors came from Colle di Compito (Monti Pisani) and he is R-U152*: one of the few tested in my zone, but probably the percentage is very high. Etruscan zone till Modena province (see Ferri’s paper, where R1b was at 67%) has more of R-L23 – and + like me. Unfortunately Ferri couldn’t put me in contact with the persons tested who were very close to me.I find very interesting what Alan Trowel Hands has said: that R1b shouldn’t be tried in East Europe, but in West Europe, in the peripheral regions to LBK, where R1b wasn’t found in DNA tested. I remember to you all my first theory: Italian refugium during the Younger Dryas of R-L23 – and +, R-L51 in the Alpine zone, differentiation of the IE languages from the Etruscan-Rhaetian-Camun, out of Italy of the hunter-gatherers who took agriculture from the Anatolians arrived to the Balkans… for the following I agree completely with Alan. I also remember what I have said many times about the Celtic languages (it is clear that existed at a precise time a German-Celtic-Italic unity), that the most ancient forms of Celt are found in Italy: the “Stele di Novilara”, in the Marches, the same Lepontian language etc. Ligurian isn’t a Celt language, but an autonomous branch of IE. The most recent studies are saying that also the most ancient forms of R-P312 aren’t in Spain (where this haplogroup has the highest percentage), but in Italy, NW Europe and in the British Isles.What about the satem languages? Probably they separated very early, perhaps when agriculturalists from the Balkans gave life to the LBK: centum languages in West Europe (hg. R1b) and satem languages in Central-East Europe (hg. R1a).

Very hard to match the movement from the Lower Rhine (mainly low countries west of the Rhine??) down to Rhine and into Italy in archaeology. If someone described that to me with no reference to variance or dates I would think of Germanci movements at the end of the Roman empire sooner than I could think of any match in prehistory. A few years ago the old beaker theory that placed their origin in the Low Countries might have fitted but noone seems to believe that theory now.

My speculation based soley on looking at the variance and hg diversity was not intended to imply the Low Countries or Belgium with any specificity. Our DNA project does not show U152 in Germany as very high variance but Myres does. I just meant to speculate the lower "half" of the Rhine so I could include Alsace-Lorraine and North-Westphalia as well as perhaps the Rhineland-Palentinate as an early point of expansion for U152.

Quote from: alan trowel hands

It is interesting if (as variance suggests) S116 first expanded in the SE France area and U152 in the Belgium area and L21 in western half of northern France and U106 around the south Baltic coast. These are all areas which were not settled by the LBK farmers who sort of bypassed these spots, treating them as undesirable. They were areas of major expansion of farming in the middle Neolithic. In fact the other strong areas of these clades all have a resememble a map of the areas of western Europe that were not yet settled by farmers until not much before c. 4000BC. L21-Atlantic France and the isles, U152-Belgium, Alpine areas, north Italy, Massive Central, U106-the north European Plain (Funnel Beaker/TRB area). Maybe those areas that were peripheral to the earliest farmers preferences still presented opportunity in the middle Neolithic because they were not settled. Each of these clade epicentres could represent L11 moving into an area with real expansion opportunities although I suppose they are really just two events - U106 in NE Europe and S116 and clades in and around France. If this is correct then their should be identifiable middle Neolithic matches for these expansions. For U106 it would probably be TRB/Funnel beaker. For L21 perhaps the Carninated Bowl tradition of France and the isles, for U152 I need to do my homework!! Ehm Maybe Rossen or the like or maybe something to do with Chassee. They all (depending on who you believe-there seems to be disagreement) have roots in the late LBK cultures but perhaps with something extra. Its the only correlation I can think of as an alternatvie to the beaker model. I would personally see the rise of language groups and ethnic identities as down to interaction networks forming identities some time after the initial dispersal of L11. I would see all the L11 clades at the points of spread into these areas as linguistically being undifferentiated west IE or maybe proto-Italo-Celtic, including Ligurians. I personally think clade patterns were dictated by geography and oppotunity during their dispersal and language groups were also dictated by contact networks that were in turn dictated partly by geography but also other considerations such as trade items, ores etc. The two things would have at best an imperfect correlation.

I am curious as to why Myres et al picked only one place in France to survey - Vaucluse. I see it is a site for some of the primary Chasséen finds. I suppose they thought it was an area that was key to look in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chass%C3%A9en_culture

It really would help to have a true representative sampling of France!

Rich, I thank you for having quoted me. About Ligurians I’d add that the map of U152.org. demonstrates also the highest percentage of R-U152 also in Lunigiana, Versilia till Pisa and the Monti Pisani, which were Ligurian territory... The percentage of R1b in Garfagnana is at the level of Basque Countries or Ireland.

Don't get carried away with frequency percentages. They don't necessarily have a correlation with ancient origins. If we thought frequency percentage was the key, it is an "open and shut" case that all of R1b originated in Ireland... or maybe even parts of Boston or O'Neill, Nebraska.

We know who peopled Boston and O’Neill and when. We also know who peopled Ireland and when: there weren’t people before these last millennia. You could say that the highest percentage in Liguria could be due to the fact that it, like Ireland, is a “cul de sac” where a wave of advance stopped, but Italy isn’t Ireland. Italy has people from at least 35.000 YBP and a wave of advance didn’t advance in a “waste land” and here April isn’t “the cruellest month”. If a similar percentage is here it does mean something very different from Ireland: i.e. that that haplogroup was born here.I think that all your Celticism will be won, it has already been won. I have given infinite proofs of my theories and the aDNA will demonstrate them, first of all Otzi we are waiting for.

We know who peopled Boston and O’Neill and when. We also know who peopled Ireland and when: there weren’t people before these last millennia. You could say that the highest percentage in Liguria could be due to the fact that it, like Ireland, is a “cul de sac” where a wave of advance stopped, but Italy isn’t Ireland. Italy has people from at least 35.000 YBP

That's what I'm saying, R-P312 looks like it found Italy to be a "cul de sac". The big difference between O'Neill and Italy is we have a much better idea of an historic migration to align with.... but as you say Italy has been inhabited for 35,000 years and since R-P312 looks to be around 4000 years old, so why would we assume R-P312 had an early origin there. We just don't know the history as it is a prehistoric timeframe. On the other hand, P312 variance is greater elsewhere.

As far as R1b-L11* and L11- it is too scattered across Europe to be able to tell much. We do know L23* is prominent in the Caucasus. Other than that, everything is quite scattered and rare.

I have fought from many years the theories of the Nordtvedts and Vizacheros etc. about the mutation rate and I think with good arguments: the mutations around the modal etc. None of the geneticists is now following these amateurs. Cruciani proposed a calibrated mutation rate between Zhivotovsky and some his own theories and was about 0,001.Vizachero said that I was for some time in the wilderness. It seems to me that he is more than in the wilderness in the desert without water. It seems to me he is losing all his battles.Re. R-P312 I have written in this forum that the last results of the 1000Genome Project is demonstrating that Italy (with North-West Europe and the British isles) has the most ancient haplotypes of this haplogroup that Spain hasn’t, then R-P312 migrated from Italy to Spain and I think before to NW Europe and the British Isles. That it is only 4000 years old we shall see next when the aDNA will be tested. I am always waiting Oetzi, who will be able to say something decisive.

I have fought from many years the theories of the Nordtvedts and Vizacheros etc. about the mutation rate and I think with good arguments: the mutations around the modal etc. None of the geneticists is now following these amateurs. Cruciani proposed a calibrated mutation rate between Zhivotovsky and some his own theories and was about 0,001....

Re. R-P312 I have written in this forum that the last results of the 1000Genome Project is demonstrating that Italy (with North-West Europe and the British isles) has the most ancient haplotypes of this haplogroup that Spain hasn’t, then R-P312 migrated from Italy to Spain and I think before to NW Europe and the British Isles. That it is only 4000 years old we shall see next when the aDNA will be tested. I am always waiting Oetzi, who will be able to say something decisive.

You mention the 1000 Genomes project. Did you see their commentary?"A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing" by The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium - 2010.

Quote from: Consortium

A striking pattern indicative of a recent rapid expansion specific to haplogroup R1b was observed, consistent with the postulated Neolithic origin of this haplogroup in Europe.

Haplogroup R1b1b2 (R-M269) is the commonest European Y-chromosomal lineage, increasing in frequency from east to west, and carried by 110 million European men. Previous studies suggested a Paleolithic origin, but here we show that the geographical distribution of its microsatellite diversity is best explained by spread from a single source in the Near East via Anatolia during the Neolithic.

The phylogenetic relationships of numerous branches within the core Y-chromosome haplogroup R-M207 support a West Asian origin of haplogroup R1b(M343), its initial differentiation there followed by a rapid spread of one of its sub-clades carrying the M269 mutation to Europe.

Nothing is impossible, but it definitely appears the majority of R1b's expansion didn't happen until the Neolithic, at the earliest. This also clearly appears to be an east to west movement from SW Asia and/or the Caucasus and Steppes. In that regards, Vizacherro, Nordtvedt, etc. look like they are on target.

What are you fighting these folks with, your beliefs? Do you have any scientific derived alternative, or just an "ancient" and isolated haplotype here and there?

I'm convinced you are a sincere man. I'm not pro or con Celtic or Italic. I'd be proud of either ancestry or both. My kids are a quarter Italian no matter what I am. I'm fine with R1b expanding through Italy. I'm just not convinced. Pray tell, please direct me to your specific data and reasoning as to your hypothesis.

Back to U152. I don't know if it is connected with Ligurians or not but the genetic evidence seems to show that U152's great expansion began north of the Alps. It did expand into North Italy in a big way.. it just didn't start there.

Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry. He has assembled http://www.u152.org/

Quote from: RRocca

It seems that out of all of the theories that have been brought up regarding U152, the distribution that most matches this U152 map is that of the Urnfield Culture.

"I don't know if this will ever help anyone finding "Italian" DNA in Ireland,but here it is from the Grove Notes to Cork Past & Present, pgs 48 & 49 re:Lombardstown:

"In the Irish official records of the 13th & 14th centuries frequentreference is made to the trading corporations of the "Societies ofMerchants" from Northern Italy which had established themselves at the portsof Dublin, Ross, Waterford, Youghal, Cork and Limerick, and also atKilkenny.Their principal business was in the export of wool to North Italy (chieflyto Florence and Lucca), the import of wines and other East Europeanmerchandise, money-lending, farming the King's customs, and acting as agentsto the Pope for the transmission of the Papal Tithes.The various Merchant Societies operating in Ireland included theFrescobaldi..., the Spini, Cerchi Neri, Mozzi and Pigoletti, all ofFlorence; the Ricardi and Bettori of Lucca, and the Bonsignori, Bernardiniand Jacopi of Siena.The Northern Italian merchants were commonly known as "The Lombards" "

This to say what? That the unique way to run is, like I say to my friend Belgieri and others, to reconstruct the haplotype of our ancestors step by step. STRs have mutations forwards and backwards (what I call the “mutations around the modal”) and without reconstructing them step by step we wont be able to now anything about our past. To reconstruct the modal of thousands of years ago like R-P312 and R-U106 without doing this is misleading.I am doing this. My closest relative is Giancarlo Tognoni: MRCA during the 15th century. We have the SNP S136. The next I have found after him (apart an anonymous Brazilian I couldn’t contact) is the Fluckiger/Flickinger family from Switzerland (MRCA during the first centuries after Christ: they come from Weissenburg/Biriciana on the Roman “Limes”, then probably Etruscans or Romans) and I am testing him for S136 etc. etc.

I don't think the fact that the oldest U152 haplotypes (as currently known) are in south Germany necessarily precludes U152 from a close connection to the ancient Ligurians. After all, at one time, the Ligurians were spread all over western Europe, and not merely confined to old Liguria in Italy.

This to say what? That the unique way to run is, like I say to my friend Belgieri and others, to reconstruct the haplotype of our ancestors step by step. STRs have mutations forwards and backwards (what I call the “mutations around the modal”) and without reconstructing them step by step we wont be able to now anything about our past. To reconstruct the modal of thousands of years ago like R-P312 and R-U106 without doing this is misleading.I am doing this. My closest relative is Giancarlo Tognoni: MRCA during the 15th century. We have the SNP S136. The next I have found after him (apart an anonymous Brazilian I couldn’t contact) is the Fluckiger/Flickinger family from Switzerland (MRCA during the first centuries after Christ: they come from Weissenburg/Biriciana on the Roman “Limes”, then probably Etruscans or Romans) and I am testing him for S136 etc. etc.

Certainly after the posting of Janet the Irishmen close to me (R1b1b2a/S136+) could be also descendants of these “Lombards” who were pretty all Tuscans.

MHammers has looked at R-L23+ L11- and I'll try to look a little harder at it myself. I do agree that understanding the distribution and diversity of the L11- folks is critical and Italy is definitely not out of the picture as an expansion point. It's just hard to pull together enough haplotypes to do any reasonable statistical calculations by geography.

Back to U152. I don't know if it is connected with Ligurians or not but the genetic evidence seems to show that U152's great expansion began north of the Alps. It did expand into North Italy in a big way.. it just didn't start there.Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry. He has assembled http://www.u152.org/

Quote from: RRocca

It seems that out of all of the theories that have been brought up regarding U152, the distribution that most matches this U152 map is that of the Urnfield Culture.

Rocca is a tremendous resource for U152. He has surpassed some of the original U152 data collectors... and he is objective, IMHO.

I'll try to get him over here on this forum but below are two posts in the last day or two that are on topic for us on this thread.

Quote from: RRocca

Iberian urnfields are almost entirely concentrated in the north-eastern quadrant of the peninsula (Catalonia, northern Valencia, and the Ebro Valley). Myres found that U152 is two to three times more frequent in Valencia (6.2%) than anywhere else in Iberia (0-3.1%). Catalonia was not tested, but Ramos-Luis showed U152 even higher in Midi-Pyrénées, also a hot-spot for French SRY2627. So, isn't it likely that U152 and SRY2627 entered NE Iberia together? If not by Urnfielders, then perhaps by an earlier proto-Iberian/proto-Ligurian migration?

In northern Italy, there is a similar progression of 'Celticization' (see timeline), so a similar pattern for Iberia seems likely. The Canegrate Culture from the XIII-XIIc BC. were proto-Celts who introduced cremation (Urnfield) into the Po Valley. They themselves melted with the Ligurians to form the Golasecca culture who had strong Hallstatt ties. The La Tene migrations, most are already familiar with.The Ligurians however, we know less about. They were aboriginal Indo-Europeans and quite possibly proto-Celts. They colonized Corsica and the high levels of U152 there may someday prove that link.

I don't think the fact that the oldest U152 haplotypes (as currently known) are in south Germany necessarily precludes U152 from a close connection to the ancient Ligurians. After all, at one time, the Ligurians were spread all over western Europe, and not merely confined to old Liguria in Italy.

Yes, the Ligurians were even in Africa (Carthage) and along the whole length of the Pyrenees, but they must have had a sort of regional "homeland" to expand from. I'm not sure if this would be an area of high frequency, high variance or both.

It almost makes me wonder if the younger the subclade, could it be high frequency does play a role of nearby origins where we find it today. I'm specifically talking about subclades that are around 3,000 years old or less.

How far east, or how long in situ does a subclade need to be in order to migrate to different regions over vast distances or even short distances? Just seems odd that subclades would spring forth from one region over vast time frame, and not move.

Or a subclade that is very young in Western Europe would have origins so far east and show a marked difference in variation. All I can think of is very rapid movement and a long isolation between place of origin and place of high frequency. But long isolation means the subclade doesn't fit very well for being a young subclade. A rapid movement would show no to very little variation for a young subclade no matter the distance involved but could be easily confusing as to which region is the place of origin since its uniform in variance. Of course the parent subclade doesn't help if its widespread over a vast region. What a dilemma!

One interesting thing about the Ligurians is that the Ora Maritima of Rufus Festus Avienus says the Ligurians were chased out of Britain by the Celts.

Quote from: Avienus

If anybody has the courage to urge his boat into the waves away from the Oestrymnides under the pole of Lycaon (in the Northern sky) where the air is freezing, he comes to the Ligurian land, deserted by its people: for it has been emptied by the power of the Celts a long time since in many battles. The Ligurians, displaced, as fate often does to people, have come to these regions.

. . .Rich Rocca has as good a handle as anybody on U152, and I think he even has an Italian ancestry. He has assembled http://www.u152.org/. . .

I noticed in one of his "editorials", on U152 in southern England, he attributes the U152 there to the Belgae from across the Channel and not to the Anglo-Saxons or Vikings. In fact, if I recall correctly, in that article he even points out that there isn't much U152 in the old homelands of the Anglo-Saxons or the Vikings.

That's certainly a step in the right direction (toward what has been obvious for a long time).

I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?Thank you, Susan

I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?Thank you, Susan

“Very little can be made of the potential SNP’s geographical distribution, except for the fact that the Tuscany, Italy samples have a higher frequency of U152* (11 of 14) and that Northern/Western European and Great Britain samples have a higher frequency of L2+ (7 of 9)”.

What does it mean? That the little Tuscany (less than 4 million inhabitants) has 14 R-U152 in the 1000 Genomes Project and that Northern/Western Europe and Great Britain. (100fold inhabited) have 9 ones. Not only, but the 14 Tuscan are 11 U152* (the ancestor) and the latter 7 out 9 L2* (the derived). Rocca’s map says that the Ligurian highest percentage all over the world of this haplogroup arrives till not only the ancient Ligurian Tuscany (till Versilia and Pisa) but till the Maremma, full Etruscan zone, then the presence of this haplogroup is very ancient I think, and not linked to historic movements.

Mr Celtigan and Mr Celtier will perceive the rabbit-punch only when it will arrive upon their head.

I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?Thank you, Susan

Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales? http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

I have my first man who has tested positive for U152 and L2 in my FTDNA Wales_Cymru project. I don't know anything about either of these SNPs, since I wasn't expecting them to turn up in Wales. Where can I go for more info on L2?Thank you, Susan

Thanks, I did look at that, and seems L2 appears pretty much wherever there is U152*. The occurence of it in Wales looks to be extremely uncommon. I don't expect I'll see too many more men in my project test positive for it, although most men who are P312+/L21- have not yet tested for U152 or L2.If there is some concentration of it in Italy, is there any way it could've been brought by the Romans to Wales? http://www.familytreedna.com/public/WalesDNA/default.aspx?section=yresults

I believe L2 is common in Italy, so I guess it could have gotten to Wales with the Romans.